Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
Show Summary Details
More options …

Barigozzi, Francesca

The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy

Editor-in-Chief: Ludwig, Sandra / Schmitz, Hendrik

Ed. by Auriol, Emmanuelle / Brunner, Johann / Fleck, Robert / Mastrobuoni, Giovanni / Mendola, Mariapia / Requate, Till / de Vries, Frans / Wenzel, Tobias / Zulehner, Christine

4 Issues per year

IMPACT FACTOR 2017: 0.306
5-year IMPACT FACTOR: 0.492

CiteScore 2017: 0.50

SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) 2017: 0.414
Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) 2017: 0.531

See all formats and pricing
More options …
Volume 18, Issue 1


Volume 6 (2006)

Volume 4 (2004)

Volume 2 (2002)

Volume 1 (2001)

Is There Really a Trade-Off? Family Size and Investment in Child Quality in India

Mehtabul Azam
  • Corresponding author
  • Department of Economics, Oklahoma State University & IZA, 326 Business Building, Stillwater, Oklahoma 74078, USA.
  • Email
  • Other articles by this author:
  • De Gruyter OnlineGoogle Scholar
/ Chan Hang Saing
Published Online: 2018-01-23 | DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/bejeap-2017-0098


We address the relationship between number of children and investment in child quality, known as quantity–quality (Q–Q) trade-off, for India. Using a number of investment and outcome measures, we find that the OLS estimates suggest the presence of Q–Q trade-offs in nine out of ten measures considered. Using the gender of the first-born child as an instrument, the trade-offs in all measures disappear. Given the concerns about the exogeneity of the instrument, we apply Oster (2016) bounds to assess the sensitivity of OLS estimates to omitted variables. We find robust trade-off estimates in three measures currently enrolled in school, years of schooling and height-for-age. The results are more robust when observing trade-offs in rural areas. Trade-offs appear in ever enrolled in school, private school attendance, expenditure on education and private coaching in addition to the trade-offs in the three measures for all India sample.

Keywords: quantity–quality trade-off; investment; educational outcomes; India

JEL Classification: O11; J13


  • Altonji, J. G., Elder T. E., and Taber C. R. 2005. “Selection on Observed and Unobserved Variables: Assessing the Effectiveness of Catholic Schools.” Journal of Political Economy 113 (1):151–184.Google Scholar

  • Angrist, J., Lavy V., and Schlosser A. 2010. “Multiple Experiments for the Causal Link between the Quantity and Quality of Children.” Journal of Labor Economics 28 (4):773–824.Web of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • Azam, M. 2016. “Explaining Caste Differences in Private School Attendance.” Review of Development Economics. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/rode.12305.Google Scholar

  • Becker, G. S. 1960. “An Economic Analysis of Fertility.” In Demographic and Economic Change in Developed Countries, edited by Becker Gary S. New Jersey: Princeton University Press.

  • Becker, G. S., and Lewis H. G. 1973. “On the Interaction between the Quantity and Quality of Children.” Journal of Political Economy 81:S279–S288.Google Scholar

  • Bhalotra, S., and Clarke D. 2016. “The Twin Instrument.” IZA DP No. 10405.

  • Black, S. E., Devereux P. J., and Salvanes K. G. 2005. “The More the Merrier? The Effect of Family Size and Birth Order on Children’s Education.” Quarterly Journal of Economics 120 (2):669–700.Google Scholar

  • Bougma, M., LeGrand T. K., and Kobiane J.F. 2015. “Fertility Decline and Child Schooling in Urban Settings of Burkina Faso.” Demography 52 (1):281–313.Web of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • Butcher, K., and Case A. 1994. “The Effect of Sibling Sex Composition on Women’s Education and Earnings.” Quarterly Journal of Economics 109 (3):531–563.Google Scholar

  • Cáceres-Delpiano, Julio. 2006. “The Impacts of Family Size on Investment in Child Quality.” Journal of Human Resources 41 (4):738–754.Google Scholar

  • Conley, D., and Glauber R. 2006. “Parental Educational Investment and Children’s Academic Risk: Estimates of the Impact of Sibship Size and Birth Order from Exogenous Variation in Fertility.” The Journal of Human Resources 41 (4):722–737.Google Scholar

  • Conley, T. G., Hansen C. B., and Rossi P. E. 2012. “Plausibly Exogenous.” Review of Economics and Statistics 94 (1):260–272.Web of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • Dahl, G. B., and Moretti E. 2008. “The Demand for Sons.” Review of Economic Studies 75 (4):1085–1120.Web of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • Dang, H., and Rogers H. F. 2016. “The Decision to Invest in Child Quality over Quantity: Household Size and Household Investment in Education in Vietnam.” World Bank Economic Review 30 (1):104–142.Web of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • Dayıoğlu, M., Kirdar M. G., and Tansel A. 2009. “Impact of Sibship Size, Birth Order and Sex Composition on School Enrolment in Urban Turkey.” Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics 71 (3):399–426.Web of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • de Haan, M. 2010. “Birth Order, Family Size and Educational Attainment.” Economics of Education Review 29:576–588.CrossrefWeb of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • Fitzsimons, E., and Malde B. 2014. “Empirically Probing the Quantity–Quality Model.” Journal of Population Economics 27:33–68.Web of ScienceCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Government of India. 2006. Social, Economic and Education Status of the Muslim Community of India. New Delhi.Google Scholar

  • Kang, C. 2011. “Family Size and Educational Investments in Children: Evidence from Private Tutoring Expenditures in South Korea.” Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics 73:59–78.Web of ScienceCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Kaul, T. 2016. Intra-Household Allocation of Educational Expenses: Gender Discrimination versus Investment for the Future. University of Maryland, mimeo.Google Scholar

  • Kugler, A. D., and Kumar S. 2017. “Preference for Boys, Family Size and Educational Attainment in India.” Demography 54:835–859.Web of ScienceCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Lee, J. 2008. “Sibling Size and Investment in Children’s Education: An Asian Instrument.” Journal of Population Economics 21 (4):855–875.Web of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • Li, H., Zhang J., and Zhu Y. 2008. “The Quantity–Quality Trade-off of Children in a Developing Country: Identification using Twins.” Demography 45 (1):223–243.Web of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • Liu, H. 2014. “The Quality-Qquantity Trade-off: Evidence from the Relaxation of China’s One-child Policy.” Journal of Population Economics 27 (2):565–602.Google Scholar

  • Maralani, V. 2008. “The Changing Relationship Between Family Size and Educational Attainment over the Course of Socioeconomic Development: Evidence from Indonesia.” Demography 45 (3):693–717.Google Scholar

  • Muralidharan, K. 2013, April. “Priorities for Primary Education Policy in India’s 12th five-year Plan.” In India Policy Forum, Vol. 9, 1–46.

  • Oster, E. 2016a. “Unobservable Selection and Coefficient Stability: Theory and Evidence.” Journal of Business and Economic Statisticshttp://dx.doi.org/10.1080/07350015.2016.1227711Google Scholar

  • Oster, E. 2016b. “PSACALC: Stata Module to Calculate Treatment Effects and Relative Degree of Selection Under Proportional Selection of Observables and Unobservables.” Statistical Software Components.

  • Qian, N. 2009. “Quantity–Quality and the One Child Policy: The Only-Child Disadvantage in School Enrollment in Rural China,” NBER Working Papers 14973.

  • Rosenzweig, M., and Zhang J. 2009. “Do Population Control Policies Induce More Human Capital Investment? Twins, Birthweight, and China’s ‘One Child’ Policy.” Review of Economic Studies 76 (3):1149–1174.Google Scholar

  • Rosenzweig, M. R., and Wolpin K. I. 1980. “Testing the Quantity-quality Fertility Model: The Use of Twins as a Natural Experiment.” Econometrica 48 (1):227–240.Google Scholar

  • Sarin, A. 2004. “Are Children from Smaller Families Healthier? Examining the Causal Effects of Family Size on Child Welfare (Unpublished doctoral dissertation).” Irving B. Harris School of Public Policy, University of Chicago, Chicago, IL.Google Scholar

  • Schultz, T. P. 2008. “Population Policies, Fertility, Women’s Human Capital and Child’s Quality.” In Handbook of Development Economics, edited by Paul Schultz T and Strauss John, Vol. 4. North Holand: Elsevier.

  • Steelman, L. C., Powell B., Werum R., and Carter S. 2002. “Reconsidering the Effects of Sibling Configuration: Recent Advances and Challenges.” Annual Review of Sociology 28:243–269.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

About the article

Published Online: 2018-01-23

Citation Information: The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, Volume 18, Issue 1, 20170098, ISSN (Online) 1935-1682, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/bejeap-2017-0098.

Export Citation

© 2018 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston.Get Permission

Comments (0)

Please log in or register to comment.
Log in